View report page

In seven of these samples water was certified to have been added. In each of
these cases the amount of added water was less than 5 per cent. Nine of the samples
showed deficiency in fat ranging from 1 to 31 per cent. below the standard laid down
by the Board of Agriculture.
Legal proceedings were instituted in 6 or 37.5 per cent. of the cases in which
samples of milk were below standard.
No legal proceedings were considered advisable regarding the remainder of the
samples of milk below which were standard. The percentage of the adulterated
samples of milk in which the departure from normal was so small that it was not
thought advisable to institute legal proceedings was 62.5.
In the report for 1933 it was mentioned that the Council had resolved on the
22nd February, 1933, that the number of samples taken should be reduced to 600
per annum, but at the Council meeting in October, 1933, it was resolved that the
sampling officer, at his discretion, be allowed to increase the samples to 650 or 700
per annum. Since that date there has been no alteration in the number of samples
to be taken under the Food & Drugs (Adulteration) Act.
Of the 23 samples of sausages taken, one informal sample was certified to contain
sulphur dioxide 120 parts per million. A formal sample was taken from the same
source, but on this occasion the preservative was disclosed.
The Public Health (Prevention of Tuberculosis) Regulations, 1925.
These Regulations prohibit a person suffering from Tuberculosis, who is in an
infectious condition, from following any employment or occupation in connection
with a dairy which would involve the milking of cows, the treatment of milk, or
the handling of vessels used for containing milk.
Preservatives in Food Regulations.
It was not necessary for these reasons to prohibit any person from following
his occupation in a dairy during the year under consideration.